3种不同药物对高血压患者降压效果及其消费成本的对比分析

目的：评价临床常用抗高血压药氨氯地平、福辛普利、吲达帕胺治疗高血压的临床效果和经济效益。方法：选择120例高血压病患者随机分为3组,每组40例,分别口服氨氯地平5 mg、福辛普利10 mg、吲达帕胺2.5 mg治疗,并进行药物经济学分析。结果：服药8周后各组患者血压均有明显下降,其中吲达帕胺、福辛普利、氨氯地平治疗高血压总有效率分别为89.4%、86.5%、91.1%,不良反应发生率分别为7.5%、10%、7.5%,成本-效果比分别为5.25、1.65、0.39,氨氯地平、福辛普利相对于吲达帕胺的增量成本-效果比分别为260.89、37.14。结论：吲达帕胺是3种抗高血压药方案中治疗高血压的最佳药物,其消费成本较低,值得在基层医院选用。

Comparison of Hypotensive Efficacy and Costs among 3 Drugs

OBJECTIVE ： To evaluate the therapeutic and economical efficacies of amlodipine, fosinopril and indapamide for hypertension. METHODS： A total of 120 hypertensive patients were randomly divided into the 3 groups of 40 each： amlodipine （5 mg）, fosinopril （10 mg） and indapamlde （2.5 mg）. A pharmacoeconomics-eost-effectiven＇ess analysis was performed. RESULTS： After treatment for 8 weeks, the blood pressure in all the 120 cases declined markedly, and the total effective rates of indapamide, fosinopril and amlodipine were 89.4 %, 86.5 % and 91.1%, respectively; the incidences of adverse drug reactions were 7.5 %, 10% and 7.5 %, respectively; and the cost-effectiveness ratios were 5.25, 1.65 and 0.39, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of amlodipine and fosinopril were 260.89 and 37.14, respectively as against indapamide. CONCLUSION： Indapamide was proved to be the optimal and most cheap hypotensive therapy among the 3 drugs, which thus deserved to be used preferably in primary level hospitals.